JULY 26, 1948

HYDE PARK, Sunday—I have just received from the Superintendent of the New York City schools, as Chairman
of the Board of Superintendents, a long communication sent to the committee that protested
the abrogation of the subscription to The Nation. This abrogation was based on some articles in The Nation that the Board of Education considers contained attacks on certain religious faiths
and beliefs.

It seems to me quite natural that magazine subscriptions and the choice of books to
be allowed in school libraries must rest with some group. It is not censorship to
make a choice as to the books, for instance, that you allow different age groups to
read in school libraries. It is not censorship to subscribe or not to subscribe to
certain magazines. The Nation had been subscribed for, however. Therefore, the question at present is whether giving
up this subscription was fair under the circumstances.

I joined this committee because it seemed to me unfair to give up a subscription because
of these articles. The reason for my feeling is this: within the school system there
should be no criticism by teachers or pupils of different religions, but there should
be material available to pupils, when they reach the proper age, that will give them
an insight into possible criticisms that may be made of different religions as well
as different political opinions, or economic theories, or scientific discoveries.

Personally, I believe that the articles under criticism expressed opinions that were
derogatory to the Roman Catholic Church and with which I do not agree. But I do not consider that a sufficient reason for giving up a subscription
to The Nation.

I have read criticisms of the Protestant Church in various other magazines and of
Protestant ministers and Protestant procedures, which were quite as derogatory. Certainly,
the Moslem faith and the Jewish faith are frequently criticized. These criticisms
should be available to young people when they are mature enough to weigh them and
to understand that they are the opinions of individuals, not to be accepted as facts
unless they themselves consider them truthful, after study and in the light of experience.

I would be opposed to using the articles that appeared in The Nation as teaching material, but not at all opposed to having the magazine available in
school as one of a number of magazines that the proper age group may read.

When I was young, in my grandfather's house there was a large library. He happened
to have a great many theological books. They did not interest me much as a child,
but I did read bits here and there which I think must have been extraordinary if I
gave them much thought. They were too profound for me, however, and I don't remember
anything about them now.

I read a great deal along many lines because I was brought up in a family that did
not believe in censorship. It must have been reasoned that if certain things were
over my head, I would forget them and that I would be less curious about undescribable
knowledge if there were no forbidden areas in the library bookshelves.

This theory might be helpful to the Board of Superintendents, which seems to me, in
this case, to have taken its choice of literature a little too seriously.

E. R.

(WORLD COPYRIGHT, 1948, BY UNITED FEATURE SYNDICATE, INC., REPRODUCTION IN WHOLE OR
IN PART PROHIBITED.)